v 3.54 tries a 'low level access' to my hdd. Previous versions did not show this behaviour. This 'new feature' is not mentioned on release notes.

Thanks zorro. Updated entry.

The newly introduced installer writes to the registry when choosing "extract only" (key: HKCU\Software\HSTools)

It's fast and solid, but it doesn't check file content. It compares files size and date but NOT the actual content.
For example, it happens that you have a file with same age and size but different/updated content (some applications are able to generate such containers, with constant dimension and untouched last modified date).
This way, I lost my data. After several years, I file like described upon suffered a sort of corruption. Not a big problem, I thought, and I overwritten it with the backupped copy. I discovered later it wasnt never updated, the file was just like I copied at first time, original state lets say. Also, since the file was overwritten there was no way to recover even the faulty one.
OK, my fault. The author specifies the rules correctly, size and date. But not everybody is aware about that. So, if you have such files, be carefull and use another app, like winmerge or similar.
Furthermore, FC is able to verify the backupped files hash, but it doesnt verify in any way the actual files in source/destination folder or partition.

I've was able to copy about 10 GB of files from an aging and extremely noisy and slow hard drive via a USB adapter -- Would have gotten a head ache had I copied from windows explorer, or tried to. PS. 0/42 flagged by virus total, it's clean. PSS. Development seems to have slowed down but there's a beta floating that adds some features / fixes some issues...some other tools are better than TC like gsrichcopy 360/fast copy/robocopy

Good program and stable operation. Recently tested this again on XP. Really fast scanning and updating of big folders with thousands of files. A 16GB folder with over 100k files took about 95 seconds to update (only a few kBs needed updating). A complete copy of 14GB took about 10mins, but still significantly faster than many other apps or Windows built-in copy.

Version 3.25 released

@ripu: I misunderstood your question - I'd recommend Dsynchronize http://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=719 with "Ask before replacing files" checked, though it won't help with the rename element.

@webfork I tried that, but it did not give any option. It just overwrote without asking. What I would like is, if there are files with same name, give me option in popup. Sometimes I will overwrite, sometimes I will cancel it and otherwise I may want to rename it.

@ripu: on the main window, click "Diff (size/date)" and choose "Copy (Overwrite)" from the drop-down menu.

I could not figure out one thing. Is there a way to get an option whether to overwrite or cancel the operation if a file with same name exists in destination?

I tested several copy/move apps a while back in a legacy laptop with WinXP SP3 focusing on Fastcopy-TeraCopy face-off and FastCopy turned out to blow out the competition big time, that's my experience, I also long for a tight system integration to achieve perfection. BTW here's a Raymond's test about this topic:
https://www.raymond.cc/blog/12-file-copy-software-tested-for-fastest-transfer-speed/

I tested several copy/move apps a while back in a legacy laptop with WinXP SP3 focusing on Fastcopy-TeraCopy face-off and FastCopy turned out to blow out the competition big time, that's my experience, I also long for a tight system integration to achieve perfection. BTW here's a Raymond's test about this topic:

How to make it the default copier for ctrl-c and ctrl-v commands? I get only context menu and drop-down entries. Is there a secret recipe?

The best and fastest file copier and easy to use.

FC has very unique features (TOP!):
# can copy Symlinks/Junctions correctly
# can DELETE locked Systemfolders e.g. System Volume Information
and all others blocked by Windows
Therefore: ''think twice before you delete anything'' (o;

Does sync properly, supports full unicode, is really small. Just excellent. Only 1 drawback - can not do jobs in a batch.

I don't use this but wanted to share a PAF version of this:
http://kalug.net/Apps/FastCopyPortable

FastCopy – fastest Windows copy product

Soure file and multi download link:
http://findallsoft.net/general/fastcopy-fastest-windows-copy-product.html

these are great advantages of that program: it supports extremely long paths and has many command line features. this is one more tested a lot and powerful tool which is called KillCopy. it seems to me that shell integration feature is more useful cause it replaces standard copying function with it self (and steps are the same - copy and paste, without appearing of additional window). but also it has feature of integration via additional context menu items without replacing system built-in copy function.

Bill: the FastCopy speed issue in the forums: http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3708

It isn't all about speed. Sometimes if you are moving a large volume of small files from one volume to another (especially a network share) windows copy will choke. If you don't want to babysit the copy and have it continue even if it fails on one file either you use one of the mentioned above or xcopy.

Tested out slightly slower than WinXP's file copying.

I tested on a laptop with a single HD w/two partitions; C & D. I copied a folder w/599 files totalling 677M from C to D. WinXP copied it in 71 seconds, Fast Copy copied it in 74 seconds.

Fast Copy output:
TotalRead = 677.1 MB
TotalWrite = 677.1 MB
TotalFiles = 599 (44)
TotalTime= 74.58 sec
TransRate= 9.08 MB/s
FileRate = 8.03 files/s

@ Everybody else

Aren't you surprised about the timings indicated by Tom?

Or am I the only one who discovered the 'Turbo' function in TeraCopy?... Hehe, just kidding ;)

Still it would be nice to read some comments on this important topic... At the end it is all about speed, right?...Otherwise we would all keep using the Windows default copy utility.

Mark

@ Tom:

You wrote:

1. TeraCopy 2.05: 29'23"
2. Normal Windows drag & drop copy: 39'42"
3. FastCopy 1.99r3: 42'59"

Are you sure? Is (') meaning minutes and (") meaning seconds? It seems to me that your copying speed is extremely slow (in all 3 methods).

BTW I am also a TeraCopy fan... But a similar operation on my system takes only a fraction of the time you mentioned... I am curious to hear from you, if you have the chance of course.

Thanks and have a great day ;)

Mark

@a: I was going to write the same thing. Win 7 copy is MUCH faster than fast copy. I was disappointed.

what?? fastcopy slower than windows file copy?

I just copied 1029 files totaling 209 MB from my laptop hard disk to my external USB hard disk (both 5400 RPM) using three different methods in Win XP Pro SP3. I used a stopwatch to time each method. Here are the results, from fastest to slowest:

1. TeraCopy 2.05: 29'23" (used 8-10 MB of RAM while copying)
2. Normal Windows drag & drop copy: 39'42"
3. FastCopy 1.99r3: 42'59" (used about 2.5 MB of RAM while copying)

Needless to say, I'll be keeping TeraCopy.

FastCopy is the only freeware copier I found that supports hard links. I had to copy an entire hard disk to another while preserving hard links, and FastCopy worked a treat!

Teracopy's 2.0 beta 3 has a portable version. No shell integration, but you can integrate it to total commander default menu bar (TC UP users has to manually edit the default.bar - anyway I think so)

I've been using this to get some data back from bad DVDR media where the last 300MB generally produces CRC errors a a few months after burning.(pretty much ALL DVDR media!)

First I run FastCopy at full speed, then if a disc throws CRC errors, I slow it down.

Using VNC to drive another computer doing this works fine, but running it directly on my main PC, the mouse is brain dead all the time and frequently goes into a coma requiring that I unplug and re-plug the cable. (USB Wacom tablet) If I run FastCopy at 30% or less, it just makes the mouse "stupid" but doesn't kill it entirely.

I've always thought USB was really fecal technology -- software based and vulnerable, awkward plug, no latch, CPU-bound! I mean, we had a dedicated plug with it's own register that DIDN'T ride on the processor, but nooooo... (a rant for another time)

I've noticed that this utility also fools Task Manager. In the processes listing, I've got nothing running more than 3%, and then only one thing. But in the performance tab, one of my cores is running at over 50%. When I shut down Fastcopy, the "phantom" disappears.

Maybe there's a more comprehensive task manager utility?

Anyway, this utility is, on the whole, really good and very useful. Portability makes it better.
Thanks

path-sync and dsyncronize can be an option too.

I haven't tried 'supercopier', but from what I've experienced, this 'FastCopy' is ... faster than TeraCopy; in fact, it is amazingly fast and stable.

You can use Supercopier as portable, all you have to do is extract all files with 7zip or uniextract and delete $COMMONFILES dir. Enjoy it!

It is combined with FreeCommander?

I used to use SuperCopier.. However it does not work with Vista, however TeraCopy works with Vista, and WinXP.

Supercopier is very nice for its integration, FastCopy is still worth looking at, I love it.

Another excellent alternative to SuperCopier, which seemed to give me some trouble before, is TeraCopy.
http://www.codesector.com/teracopy.php

It is free for home users and it integrated well with Windows. Not portable, however, just like SuperCopier.

I know this is a portable software site but I prefer this type of thing to be more closely tied with the OS like supercopier. http://supercopier.sfxteam.org/modules/mydownloads/index.php?sel_lang=english

It would be better if this app worked a bit more transparently and just sped up windows file transfers.